The primary challenge of today's Information Technology (IT) industry is to eliminate the deficiencies of the most frequently used communication standards, E-mail, Blogs, Forum, and Chat (EBFC). E-mail is plagued with relentless spams and unsecured server nodes; Blogs support only broadcasting but lack discussion; Forums support discussion but are limited to topic only; and Chat supports instant message type discussion but is size limited in both messages and groups. The various forms of communication standards/methods may be ill-suited for communicating across organizational hierarchies and especially ill-suited for organizing activities and communicating critical information during emergency situations (e.g., tsunami, earthquake, etc.)
Organizations, especially Non Profit and/or Charity organizations, may also face challenges when figuring out how to take advantage of various communication standards, including one or more of abovementioned EBFC communication methods for their mission critical tasks. For example, mission critical tasks of disaster response organizations may involve the management of volunteers, safety of volunteers and clients, just-in-time delivery of resources and logistic supplies, administration of clients, etc., as well as cost-efficient and effective means for fund raising. Faith based organizations, on the other hand, may require communication platforms which could handle their mission critical tasks, such as managing weekly gatherings, broadcasting location of events, recruiting/organizing/managing volunteers, and also the cost-effective and efficient means of fund raising, etc. For community based organizations, the mission critical tasks may include recruiting/organizing/managing volunteers, organizing/announcing/managing events or classes, communicating with volunteers and clients, and reducing the cost of fund raising. Overall, these organizations are hierarchical in nature and may have to deal with mission critical tasks, sometimes in emergency situations. Thus, current communication methods and standards (e.g., EBFC) may not be flexible or customizable enough to be adapted to or meet the needs of such organizations.